What beacon problem? If you don't know then you probably don't use beacons. If you use beacons then you probably wonder why more often than not they simply do not work. I don't believe it is "just a server thing" as a few select people have told me with straight faces. If you are trying to use a beacon you will notice that instead of staying on continuously as long as you are within range, it will instead turn off for long moments - sometimes a minute or more - and then turn back on for a few seconds and then stop working again. It is dead. It simply does not work. Well maybe it is just a "Server Thing"? No. If it were just a "server thing" then there wouldn't be a near perfect statistical correlation between the beacons not working and a specific player (we will call him/her "Player X") being online. If it were a "server thing" then the beacons would just stop working in accordance with the server's own arcane decision-making process and there would be no statistical correlation between the functioning of beacons and the presence or absence of Player X. What correlation? Over the past few months several independent experiments were conducted where 1 staff member would be positioned so as to load suspected lag chunks while another staff member would monitor a redstone lag detection device. This device operates on the principal that circuits that rely on fast-pulse timing to function properly will begin to breakdown in the presence of server lag and that if you build into the circuit a way to announce this breakdown you can use the circuit as an effective lag detector. This is a well-known circuit and is simple, reliable and effective. This circuit was used to verify the mountains of anecdotal evidence that has piled up in the form of "My beacons stop working whenever Player X is online". To be clear: Sometimes for very short periods of time, the beacons will also stop due to some confluence of events that cannot be reliably reproduced and can be considered transitory and of no statistical significance. Player X has suggested that "I am not the cause of the lag because the beacons lag sometimes when I am not online". This is a form of the logical fallacy called "Denying the Antecedent". An example of this same logical structure that will make it more obvious is this: 1. If you behead the King, he will die 2. You did not behead the King 3. Therefore, the King will not die As you can see, is absurd because it implies that it is impossible for the king to die except by beheading. But notice it is the exact same logical structure as: 1. If Player X is online then the beacons will lag 2. Player X is not online 3. Therefore the beacons will not lag The fact that the beacons sometimes lag when Player X is not online has no bearing on the correlations that exist. A short aside.... Some time back a moderator noticed my entities were causing lag so I was asked to slaughter half of my animals. Was I happy about this? No. But I think that moderator (Elle Lightbulb) was doing a heck of a job in investigating conditions that cause the overall player experience to deteriorate - she was doing her job and doing it well. I choked back my tears and I began to slaughter those animals in ways that haunt me to this day. I even beat a sheep to death with a piece of Fried Fish! After a short time it became something of a lark as I fired fire arrows straight up and waited to see who the lucky sheep would be. Anyways, I also think the staff who investigated these reports of severe beacon disturbances were also doing a great job and everyone who plays on VanillaWorld should thank them if this information I am posting now is acted on in a way that eliminates the cause of this lag. So, what is going to happen? Well, that depends on the flow of actions that occurs next. So let's explore a flowchart of what might be going on - what could explain the beacon situation. 1. Does the senior staff believe there is a beacon problem? So which is the more likely scenario? To NOT believe there is a problem they would need to believe that all of the players complaining in chat, all of the players sending messages, the results of the mods lag detectors and the anecdotal statistics of beacon lagging starting when Player X comes online and stopping after Player X logs off are all LIES. CONCLUSION: My life experience tells me it is more likely that the senior staff believes that there is a beacon problem. 2. So, acknowledging there is a problem, do they believe it is caused by Player X? Here we must first ask if staff thinks it is random or if it has a cause. For them to believe it is random they would again need to just assume everyone who has correlated the arrivals/departures of Player X with the beacon lag are lying or simply incapable of performing anything as complex as noticing such a correlation. CONCLUSION: I don't believe the staff could ignore all of the evidence and so must understand that Player X is causing the lag 3. So if they recognize there is a problem and know who is causing it, are they going to fix it? I see two possibilities here: They have been furiously working on the problem for months but no matter how much time/effort/money/etc. they pour into it, they cannot find the fix They have decided not to bother fixing it Note that there are several types of "hey - here's a happy pill for ya" actions that could be said to have been taken in an "effort" to fix the problem but unless it is #1 above, we all know it is really #2. For example - "we tried xyz but it only abc'ed so we are waiting for blah blah blah" Yeah. This is covered by #2 above. So why isn't it fixed? Have they tried World-editing out the chunks we all know is causing this and then seeing if the lag goes away? Why not? When a decision is made, it is ALWAYS made to the benefit of the person making the decision. Sometimes this benefit is to gain something positive and sometimes it is made to avoid something negative. So the reason why this beacon problem still exists can be determined if we knew the benefit attached to not taking action. Because the clear and obvious action to remove the lag would be to go to Player X's chunks and temporarily remove them to see if the problem goes away and this is not being done, we can look into why messing with Player X's land would be such a negative consequence that it would serve as motivation for not taking action - and think how negative indeed it must be! To have so many players livid about their beacons being nerfed and still choose to not touch those chunks. So WHY? What is the connection between whoever Player X is and the senior staff not being willing to fix the problem for everyone on this server by touching those chunks? This is where logic must cease for the answers to these final questions are clouded in the murky world of interpersonal relationships and I am merely a player. In Conclusion Okay. So please understand that I am not judging anybody! This is a private server - I am not saying that the staff here "should" do anything related to game play at all - it is their server to do with as they please. I guess the purpose of all this is to ask for the respect that I feel is due ALL people and has nothing to do with the server or game. It seems to me that it has been decided to allow Player X to ruin the experience of using beacons on this server and we as PEOPLE, deserve to at least be told the truth so we have all the facts needed to make fully educated decisions about what we do next - I spend $120 a year to play here and I would like the full Minecraft experience.